Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about a parking permit scheme which the Council introduced more than 15 years ago. This is because the complaint is late and there are good reasons not to exercise our discretion to investigate it. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s more recent consultation as it is unlikely we would find fault and Mrs X may put any allegation of trespass to the court.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mrs X, complains about a parking permit scheme on her road. She says the Council has marked parking bays on her land without her permission and the matter has caused stress and inconvenience.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal. We may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal but cannot investigate if the person has already appealed. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
6. The Traffic Penalty Tribunal considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for all areas of England outside London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I reviewed Mrs X’s complaint and the Council’s response. I shared my draft decision with Mrs X and took account of her comments.

Back to top

What I found

8. The Council introduced a parking permit scheme covering part of Mrs X’s road more than 15 years ago. Mrs X does not agree with the scheme and wants the Council to withdraw it, or part of it, so that it does not apply outside her property. She complains the scheme is not properly enforced and does not provide value for money. She is also unhappy the Council has refreshed road markings on her land without her permission.
9. The Council re-consulted on the scheme in 2018 and decided on the basis of the responses received that it would continue with it. Mrs X disputes the outcome of the Council’s consultation as she says it consulted residents on the part of the road where it does not apply. She says the scheme does not meet the current criteria and as a result of the parking restrictions the Council has issued her a penalty charge notice (PCN).
10. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. Mrs X’s concerns about the introduction of the scheme relate to the Council’s actions from more than 15 years ago and they are therefore late.
11. While the Ombudsman has discretion to investigate late complaints I have seen no good reasons to exercise our discretion in this case. The Council confirms documentation relating to the decision to implement the parking permit scheme is no longer available due to the length of time that has passed and we could not therefore effectively investigate this point. The Council is under no absolute duty to enforce the parking restrictions/permit scheme along Mrs X’s road and it is for it alone to decide how to allocate its resources.
12. While Mrs X’s complaint about the 2018 consultation may be in time, it is for the Council to decide who it will consult. It has explained its reasons for consulting all residents along the road and they are rational and not open to challenge by the Ombudsman.
13. It is not for us to decide whether the Council’s re-painting of the road markings on land which Mrs X claims ownership of amounts to trespass and Mrs X confirms she has sought legal advice on this point. If she believes the Council is not entitled to take this action it would be reasonable for her to take the matter to court.
14. Mrs X has now appealed against the PCN issued by the Council and we cannot therefore investigate any complaint about its issue and/or whether the restriction/scheme is enforceable against her.

Back to top

Final decision

15. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. The substantive issue is late and it is unlikely we would find fault in the Council’s more recent actions. Mrs X’s concerns about trespass are a matter for the courts.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman